>"So what then? You're saying we might just as well roll over and play dead, 'cause those media hacks will never give us even a halfway fair shake? We can put our best foot forward, provided we _try_. Dr. Conway did a good job of presenting us to the media at AC."
Unfair to blame it on 'media hacks', when the problem is initially of our own making. They wouldn't have anything to report if we didn't present them with the material and image -to- report on.
But, no, I'm not saying that we roll over and play dead. I'm saying that we don't continue to give them any negative image to report on at all. Dr Conway did a wonderful job, but it was through controlling what information was released to the press; it was a PR job, rather than really news. The media, journalists and hacks alike, are going to go with what they can find and what's most visible. What image of furry, fandom or otherwise, is most visible and easy to find?
>"Besides, I like to think that most people are well aware that the modern media has turned into a freak show. Truth and facts take second place to yellow journalism and sensationalism. Be honest now; last month's massacres aside, when last did the national news actually present something that meant something to you or your community, as compared to the latest sex scandal or brutal murder?"
Murders and scandals are not news!?
First off, it isn't the modern media. News media have done that for years immemorial, for the simp[le sake that it will sell. So you can blame the consumer for that. Secondly, not all news outlets are that shallow. But even they can only report on what they can find; if only one side is visible to them, than that is the side that they will report on.
And, yeah, I get lots of valuable info from the news. Means something to me or my community? What's that supposed to mean? News reporting isn't an outlet for community services; it's just an outlet for reporting on events, whether they seem sensationalistic or not. Here, locally, we've had a series of investigative reporting between the two local papers concerning the police cover-up of a sloppy investigation of a (non-existant) daycare sex ring (without which, a lot of innocent people would have served long sentences for something they never did), and on possible criminal malpractice in a local cancer clinic. I consider those to be quite valuable.
>"My own take on this is we might as well ignore the media. The fools who swallow anything they hear or read will continue doing so, and the folks who use their brain cells will take a closer look if they're interested. And, really, what exactly can these articles do to us (aside from starting lengthy and ultimately useless threads)?"
Well, this contradicts your opening comments about doing something as opposed to playing dead. So which is it that you're reccommending!?
What harm does it do? The same harm that doing nothing always does. "All it requires for evil to prevail is to stand by and do nothing." The 'evil' in this instance is the harm done to the reputation of furry fandom by not contesting the image being conveyed and affirmed by the public media. Unless you -prefer- being thought of as a pervert?
>"So what then? You're saying we might just as well roll over and play dead, 'cause those media hacks will never give us even a halfway fair shake? We can put our best foot forward, provided we _try_. Dr. Conway did a good job of presenting us to the media at AC."
Unfair to blame it on 'media hacks', when the problem is initially of our own making. They wouldn't have anything to report if we didn't present them with the material and image -to- report on.
But, no, I'm not saying that we roll over and play dead. I'm saying that we don't continue to give them any negative image to report on at all. Dr Conway did a wonderful job, but it was through controlling what information was released to the press; it was a PR job, rather than really news. The media, journalists and hacks alike, are going to go with what they can find and what's most visible. What image of furry, fandom or otherwise, is most visible and easy to find?
>"Besides, I like to think that most people are well aware that the modern media has turned into a freak show. Truth and facts take second place to yellow journalism and sensationalism. Be honest now; last month's massacres aside, when last did the national news actually present something that meant something to you or your community, as compared to the latest sex scandal or brutal murder?"
Murders and scandals are not news!?
First off, it isn't the modern media. News media have done that for years immemorial, for the simp[le sake that it will sell. So you can blame the consumer for that. Secondly, not all news outlets are that shallow. But even they can only report on what they can find; if only one side is visible to them, than that is the side that they will report on.
And, yeah, I get lots of valuable info from the news. Means something to me or my community? What's that supposed to mean? News reporting isn't an outlet for community services; it's just an outlet for reporting on events, whether they seem sensationalistic or not. Here, locally, we've had a series of investigative reporting between the two local papers concerning the police cover-up of a sloppy investigation of a (non-existant) daycare sex ring (without which, a lot of innocent people would have served long sentences for something they never did), and on possible criminal malpractice in a local cancer clinic. I consider those to be quite valuable.
>"My own take on this is we might as well ignore the media. The fools who swallow anything they hear or read will continue doing so, and the folks who use their brain cells will take a closer look if they're interested. And, really, what exactly can these articles do to us (aside from starting lengthy and ultimately useless threads)?"
Well, this contradicts your opening comments about doing something as opposed to playing dead. So which is it that you're reccommending!?
What harm does it do? The same harm that doing nothing always does. "All it requires for evil to prevail is to stand by and do nothing." The 'evil' in this instance is the harm done to the reputation of furry fandom by not contesting the image being conveyed and affirmed by the public media. Unless you -prefer- being thought of as a pervert?